Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The Validating Outcomes by Including Consumer Experience (VOICE) project is developing patient reported experience measure (PREM) tools to collect consumer feedback for Indigenous primary healthcare (IPHC) services' accreditation and quality improvement processes. This study aimed to explore the views of health service staff about: (1) optimising the feasibility of collection, analysis and interpretation of findings; and (2) resourcing requirements for implementation of the PREM. DESIGN: A participatory action research qualitative study design, guided by an Indigenous advisory group. Our team of Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers conducted semistructured focus groups and individual interviews with IPHC staff. Focus groups and interviews were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. Multiple sense-making meetings were conducted with the Indigenous advisory group. SETTING: Eight partner IPHC services across four Australian states and territories. PARTICIPANTS: All staff were eligible and invited to participate in the study via purposive and snowball sampling. Administrative staff (eg, receptionist, programme facilitator), clinicians/practitioners (eg, general practitioner, nurse, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health workers and practitioners) and service managers (eg, CEO, practice manager) from partner health services participated. RESULTS: 63 staff participated; 44 attended across 13 focus groups, with the remainder participating in individual interviews. The majority of participants were between 35 years and 55 years old (52%), female (66%) and working in frontline IPHC service delivery roles (56%). Equal numbers identified as Indigenous (50%) and non-Indigenous (50%). Many had worked in the Indigenous health and well-being sector for over 10 years (40%). 'Culturally safe care' and 'accountability' were identified as primary themes and key reasons for gathering consumer feedback. Subthemes identified were 'Relationships', 'trust and respect', 'communication about consumer feedback', 'timing and frequency of requesting consumer feedback', 'health service systems', 'health service and staff capacity', 'staff skills' and 'structure and administration of the PREM'. All themes and subthemes need to be considered for the successful design and implementation of PREMs in IPHC settings. CONCLUSION: Many of the issues identified are not currently considered in the process of collecting PREM data for accreditation yet, if addressed, would likely improve the quality and relevance of data collected. The findings from this study will inform the co-design and validation of Indigenous-specific PREM tools to collect consumer feedback. Critically, service and community input will ensure the PREM tools meet service needs for continuous quality improvement and accreditation and reflect the priorities and values of Indigenous peoples.